Wrong. He is & thats the problem. Unless giving Jose a new contract wasn't a footballing matter? And then a few months later not backing him fully in the market, knowing Mourinho would implode and suck the whole team down with him. Therefore writing off an entire season and costing the club millions in a pay-off, not to mention missing out on CL money.
Ole has recently said himself when asked about transfers, speak to Ed Woodward. Jose said the same and LvG.
I have stated repeatadly in this thread and others that the Mourinho appointment and the prolongation of his contract something that Woodward can and should be criticised about.
At the same time I dont think I am overexaggerating if I say that 90 percent of the Caf was for the Mourinho appointment at the time.
Even I warmed to the idea and I detest Mourinho as a person and the type of football he represents.
Its being very retrospective to maul Woodward for that decision today IMO.
The prolongation is actually an interesting issue, that we will probably never know the truth about. If I would guess, I think Mourinho threatened to walk out of the club that coming summer for PSG without a prolongation. Our league position was quite OK then as were the results.
The club probably weighed up their options and took a decision that later would be proved wrong.
I dont believe that Woodward took this decision on his own either. It would have been vetted with the Board of Advisors, who I have always argued are the first people to be replaced if the club ever will be able to take a more progressive route.
I guess my point is either of these decisions are sackable offences in my world when it comes to Woodward. And they will absolute not be to the Glazers, which like it or not is the relevant question.